Duped: Why Innocent People Confess—and Why We Believe Their Confessions
This month we’re looking at all the ways the government hates we the people, making this weeks book Duped: Why Innocent People Confess—and Why We Believe Their Confessions by Saul Kassin, PhD. So lets do this.
Actually, I’m not really sure where to begin with this one. It’s absolutely horrifying, what is discussed and revealed herein. I know I mentioned in last weeks book Blackstone’s Maxim, it’s better that 10 guilty men go free than 1 innocent man suffer. This book highlights just how far afield we are from that maxim.
I’m going to start with the why we believe them. Kassin goes into a whole lot of the science and proof behind it, but I’m going to sum it up nice a sweet. We believe confessions because we as a people don’t think that we, as individuals, would EVER confess to something we had not done. In this wholly failable belief in our own individual integrity, we fail to empathize with someone who is in an unwinnable situation: the police interrogation room. The police can say “You’re free to leave whenever” but the stark reality is, most of us are programmed to be cooperative and helpful to authority. And leaving during what starts as a friendly conversation seems...well...not cooperative or helpful at all. And that’s invariably how it starts.
Your neighbor gets robbed and the police ask you to come to the station to provide a statement as to what you saw and what you know. You like your neighbor so you want to be helpful, so you agree. And the conversation starts out friendly enough, the officer is personable in a getting to know you kind of way. Only...well, thanks to what was the predominant interrogation method taught over the last like 70 years, known as the Reid Technique, named after John Reid who basically created it, the officer is evaluating you. And thanks to Reid, the officer is pretty sure that he is a human lie detector, and for whatever reason, he has decided that YOU are lying.
Now the fun begins. The conversation slowly turns from friendly to adversarial. And if you make like you’re going to take them up on that offer to leave whenever, you’ll officially be placed under arrest. You’ll be read some version of the Miranda warnings, so familiar to us all from cop dramas on TV. Here’s the kicker….we all know the text by heart, thanks to television. But generally speaking, innocent people don’t ask for the attorney, even though it’s the innocent who NEED that protection the most. The cops may even say something to the effect of if you’re innocent, why do you need an attorney. And exoneree after exoneree reported NOT EVEN ASKING for attorney for the same reason: I was innocent, why did I need an attorney?
Well, here’s why. Because the cops can and will twist every single thing you say into making you seem guilty. Like the 13 year old who turns everything into a slightly dirty statement, complete with Beavis and Butthead chuckle. Only instead of turning what you say into a sex joke, they turn it into a “You totally robbed your neighbor, and here’s how I know” statement.
It’s irritating when 13 years olds do it. It’s catastrophic when grown adults do it and then use that skill to send you to prison for a decade or more for a crime you didn’t commit. And then they will hold and interrogate you, without break or respite, denying you sleep, food, drink, and bathroom breaks, until you confess just to make it stop. There’s some other tricks in there, like they might minimize the matter...”it was only the TV and a little vandalism, you can probably pay that back in a weekend…” but in the end, they get you to confess. And then they tell you that in addition to the robbery, your neighbors cousin was visiting and was sexually assaulted. If you did the robbery, then you must have assaulted her too. Tell me about that.
And after you’ve practiced the confession...literally rehearsed it like you’re delivering lines at a Hollywood audition...they’ll have you repeat it all on camera for the District Attorney. And then even if you recant, after a good nights sleep and some much needed food, the DA now has that confession on tape. And they will introduce it into evidence. And the Judge overseeing your case, because they ALSO believe that confession trumps all, WILL allow that confession to be read into the transcript or shown in court. Even though you recanted. Because the judge doesn’t know any different or better.
And the really fun part...even when DNA evidence absolutely proves you did not assault the visiting cousin, it may not make a difference. Because JURIES also don’t know any better, and believe that confessions trump everything, even DNA evidence. The DA will spin it like...you assaulted the cousin AFTER the DNA match had consensual sex, only you didn’t cum. No joke! That is one of the exonerees in the book. And there are so many I don’t recall exactly which one. But poor kid was induced to confess, DNA evidence 100% excluded him, but his confession still landed him in prison, because the DA made that exact argument.
All of this, because empathy has run very far afield. An awful lot of people CLAIM to be empaths. But are wholly incapable of putting themselves in someone elses shoes and seeing that yes...false confessions do happen under duress. Hell, the author even famously cites the 1692 Salem Witch trials where 151 people were arrested. Not everyone was interrogated, but of those that were, 55 confessed. Those who confessed were eventually released and went on to live long lives. The 20 who did NOT confess, were executed! This lives today in the American zeitgeist. We know, intellectually, that false confessions are a real and horrifying thing. But fail to extend that belief when sitting in a court room, on a jury, listening to one.
So, other than the above outlined, first I’m your friend, but really I’m looking to hang you, how do cops achieve the false confession? That bloody Reid Technique. It’s technically a nine step process, although not all nine steps are used all the time, or even the majority of the time. All false confessions begin with isolating the suspect. Put them in a small room, with minimal furniture, none of it comfortable, with the infamous one way mirror so that other detectives can observe...and thanks to Hollywood, the suspect knows they’re being observed.
Once the setting is ready, step 1 is a positive confrontation. I know you did this. Then you minimize what was done….I know you didn’t mean to assault that girl. You went in for the TV and were surprised she was there. It wasn’t your intent to assault her. Whenever the subject tries to deny it, interrupt their denial. Don’t let them build up steam with their denials, because if they entrench with their belief in their innocence, the interview might end with no confession. That is also part 4: constantly interrupting the denial overcomes their objections regarding their guilt. Also helps with step 5: keeps them dazed and confused throughout the interview process. Become sympathetic as soon as the subject shows signs of resigning and “telling the truth” aka what you the interrogator wants to hear. Give them the option to appear sympathetic vs morally reprehensible. She’s awfully pretty, if I weren’t happily married, I might have made a pass at her myself...vs, that’s disgusting, I have a daughter and if you did to my daughter what you did to your neighbors cousin, I wouldn’t bother with a trial. Get that admission of guilt. Then get it written down or on tape.
Case study after case study disclosed in this book follows some element of the above format. And innocent lives are ruined because of this, while the guilty go free, and in some cases are offered plea bargains to testify AGAINST the innocent person who has landed in the cross-hairs of a police interrogation.
Wrongful convictions are expensive on two fronts. First, there is the very real monetary penalties that we the people pay when an innocent person is exonerated. Those million dollar settlements are paid out of tax payer dollars...the police don’t pay that. We do. So there’s a financial incentive to start paying attention. Then there’s the cost in horror...while the innocent person sits in prison, the ACTUAL offender is out there offending again. More than one person was exonerated when DNA evidence from subsequent crimes links back to the crime for which they are sitting in prison. Meaning someone else out there was victimized by the true guilty party, because the police focused on their gut feeling, rather than actual evidence.
And there’s the cost in horror of OH MY GOD AN INNOCENT PERSON IS IN PRISON FOR A CRIME THEY DID NOT COMMIT! And the absolute stigma that follows someone even after exoneration. There are people TO THIS DAY who believe Amanda Knox killed Meredith Kercher. This despite a finding of factual Innocence by the courts in Italy. And this is true of every exoneree. There are always people that think they got away with something.
Lives ruined and wasted and lost because cops think they’re human lie detectors. Let’s talk about actual lie detectors for a minute. This is so pseudoscientific the US Supreme Court has disallowed their use in federal trials. Most courts won’t even allow lie detector evidence. And yet to this day, cops act like its some big gotcha moment if you agree to take one OR disagree to take one. Agree to take one and it’s virtually guaranteed you’ll be told you failed, because that will help them get you to confess. Refuse to take one and they’ll ask you what you’re hiding. It’s a literal catch-22.
And Kassin goes into all of this in great detail, shedding light on some well known and some not so well known exonerees, putting paid to the proverb “there but for the grace of God go I.”
He does have some suggestions and proposed reforms, which are an excellent way to start. Start with any time someone is in police custody, whether its for an interview or an interrogation, the entire thing from start to finish must be recorded. And if a confession is being entered into evidence, then the ENTIRE THING, from start to finish, even if it’s 16 hours long, must be played for the jury. And the recording should include camera angles that include both the suspect AND the interrogators. Because research has shown that if only the suspect is shown, then people watching tend to forget the suspect isn’t talking in a vacuum. Someone is there asking questions. Seeing that person gives you an idea of the pressure the suspect has been placed under to confess.
If someone recants, then experts on false confessions should be allowed to be included as defense witnesses. Because while intellectually people may be aware it’s a possibility, they never think they’ll see it. Or rather, people are programmed to think we’re all excellent lie detectors. When in reality, you’re no better than a coin flip at spotting a lie vs the truth.
Cops are allowed to lie to suspects. That should be banned. Ban false-evidence. Cops will lie and say we have evidence that shows you were at the location where the crime occurred….when no such evidence exists. This should absolutely be illegal. If the cops can’t get a confession with the truth, then maybe they have the wrong guy.
The Reid Technique should be banned. Child suspects SHOULD be treated with, well, kid gloves. Because children are enormously more likely to confess falsely under pressure than adults.
He recommends the PEACE technique for interrogation, which is an acronym for Planning and preparation, Engage and explain, account, closure, and evaluation.
Before ever sitting down with a suspect, the investigator should know everything about the crime scene, know what evidence exists and what does not, talk to witnesses and forensic examiners, learn what they can about a suspect so that there are actual goals in the interview, beyond just a confession. And for the love of god, if there’s DNA, test it before interviewing anyone. You should know if the DNA is to a hispanic man so you don’t waste time and resources interviewing, oh I don’t know, five black juveniles, like what happened with Central Park Jogger case in 1989.
Engage and explain lets you build rapport. And it really is easier to get someone to talk to you if you have rapport with them, versus an antagonistic, confrontational interrogation style.
Account is where you allow them to tell you what happened, without interruption. Yes, a suspect might lie. But if you already know what happened, you can trip them up with their own lies, versus manufacturing lies of your own.
Closure is simply winding up the interview. And Evaluation helps determine what the next steps in the investigation should be.
It all sounds very civilized, but America still sees itself as the wild west of law enforcement. Its still us versus them, rather than a search for truth and justice. And innocence suffers, when police and DA’s only look to boost their own stats, rather than seek justice for the victims.
This book was a tragedy to read through. It was eye opening and heartbreaking to read through. But I would encourage everyone to do so so that IF you find yourself on a jury, you can be prepared to say no...I think that confession may have been coerced. I think DNA...like actual science...should trump what a scared kid said when pressured into it by law enforcement, without the benefit of an attorney. And I’ll say it again...if you get called to come to the police station to give a witness station, take a lawyer with you. If they ask why you need a lawyer, just ask if they’ve ever heard of Saul Kassin. If they say no, say well too bad I have, I want an attorney present.
